Second Meeting of the Regional Network of Legal and Technical Experts on Transport Facilitation

Incheon, 25-26 March 2015

Summary of the comparative studies on subregional agreements on transport

facilitation

Proposed model subregional agreement

Fedor KormilitsynEconomic Affairs OfficerTransport Facilitation and Logistics SectionTransport Division, UNESCAP

Outline

• Subregional agreements on transport facilitation (SRAs) inESCAP region, their nature and purpose

• Subregional agreements on transport facilitation includedinto the scope of the studies

• Purpose and methodology of the studies

• Conclusions and recommendations of the studies

2

Subregional Agreements on Transport Facilitation (SRA)

• Asia and the Pacific region is wide and diverse, includes subregions withdifferent geographic, economical historical and ethno-cultural background

• A number of frameworks of subregional bodies, entities, initiatives serving forsubregional cooperation and integration if their member States

• Development of subregional cooperation includes improvement of transportconnectivity within the subregions

• Subregional bodies create their own legal instruments to facilitate transportoperations within the particular block

• Agreement is the most common form of a subregional legal instrument

3

Some Subregional Organizations/Initiatives and Subregional Agreements on Transport Facilitation

in the ESCAP Region

4

ASEAN

• Member countries:

• Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Viet Nam

5

ASEAN Agreementson Transport Facilitation

• Selected ASEAN agreements on transport facilitation: • Agreement on the Recognition of Domestic Driving Licenses issued

by ASEAN Countries, 1985;• Agreement on the Recognition of Commercial Vehicle Inspection

Certificates for Goods Vehicles and Public Service Vehicles issued by ASEAN Member Countries, 1998;

• Framework Agreement on the Facilitation of Goods in Transit, 1998;• Framework Agreement on Multimodal Transport, 2005; and• Framework Agreement on Facilitation of Inter-State Transport,

2009.

CIS

• ESCAP Member countries also members to CIS:

Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan

7

Agreements of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), related to Transport Facilitation

• CIS Agreements attempt to establish a common transport area and set up common standards for specific areas related international road transport

• Examples:

• CIS Agreement on Mutual Cooperation in the Field of InternationalRoad Transport of Goods , 2003

• CIS Agreement on Procedures of Transit through the Territories ofthe CIS Member States, 1999

• CIS Agreement on Weights and Dimensions, 1999• CIS Agreement on International Weighing Certificate, 2004

ECO

• Member countries :

• Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Islamic Republic of Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan

9

ECO Transit Transport Framework Agreement, 1998

• Aimed to facilitate transit transport and provide necessary facilities,ensure safety and avoid unnecessary delay, and avoid fraud/tax evasionand harmonize administrative affairs

• Composed of forty articles and eight annexes• Covers transit transport by road, rail, inland waterway, multimodal and

access by port• Participating countries: Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Islamic Republic of

Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkey (all –signed and ratified) and Turkmenistan (signed)

10

GMS 

• GMS Agreement for Facilitation of Cross-border Transport of Goods and People, 1999

• Contracting Parties: Cambodia, China, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Thailand and Viet Nam

11

GMS Agreement for Facilitation of Cross-border Transport of Goods and People, 1999

• Composed of 44 articles, 17 annexes and 3 protocols;• Covers areas related to transport, immigration, customs and quarantine;• Originally signed by LaoPDR, Thailand and Viet Nam;• Later acceded by Cambodia, China and Myanmar;• Main agreement entered into force in 2003;• Annexes and protocols are partly in force.

SCO

• SCO Agreement on Facilitation of International Road Transport, 2014

• Contracting Parties : China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan

13

TRACECA

• TRACECA Agreement, 1998

• Contracting Parties: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Islamic Republic of Iran Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Romania, Tajikistan, Turkey, Ukraine, Uzbekistan

14

Basic Multilateral Agreement on International Transport for the Development of the Europe-Caucasus-Asia Corridor (TRACECA),

1998

• Signed in 1998 and entered into force in 2000

• Consists of 16 articles and 4 technical annexes to the agreement

• Participating countries: Azerbaijan, Armenia, Bulgaria, Georgia, Iran (the Islamic Republic of), Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkey, Ukraine and Uzbekistan

Cambodia

ThailandViet Nam

MyanmarLao PDR

China

Brunei Darussalam

Indonesia

Philippines

Singapore

Malaysia

Armenia

AzerbaijanGeorgia

Kyrgyzstan

Tajikistan

Turkmenistan*Uzbekistan*

Afghanistan

Islamic Rep. of Iran

PakistanTurkey

GMS-Cross Border Transport Agreement (CBTA)

ASEAN Framework Agreement on the Facilitation of Goods in Transit

ECO Transit Transport Framework Agreement

SCO Agreement on Facilitation of International

Road Transport

Basic Multilateral Agreement on International Transport for the

Dev. of the TRACECARussian Federation

Kazakhstan

Examples of overlapping contracting parties in subregional agreements

Purpose of the Studies

• Compare the provisions of selected subregional agreementson transport facilitation

• Identify commonalities and differences between theprovisions of major subregional agreements, primarily ingeographically overlapping countries

• Propose ways to harmonize the provisions of differentsubregional agreements, especially in geographicallyoverlapping countries

• Propose a common framework for subregional agreements ontransport facilitation

17

Methodology of the studies

• Main focus of the studies: international road transport of goods• Conduct study under the Regional Network of Legal and Technical

Experts on Transport Facilitation• Rely on expertise of the Regional Network members• Allocate national experts from the countries, which are the contracting

parties to subregional agreements to prepare different modules of thestudy

• Secretariat to summarize the findings of the studies, conclusions andrecommendations made by national experts and to make finalconclusions and recommendations

18

Comparative studies conducted by Regional Network members:

• ASEAN AFAFGIT and AFAFIST vs GMS CBTA (overallprovisions, provisions on transport)

• ASEAN AFAFGIT and AFAFIST vs GMS CBTA (otherfacilitation provisions)

• ASEAN AFAMT vs GMS CBTA (provisions on multimodaltransport)

• ECO TTFA vs TRACECA• ECO TTFA vs selected CIS and EURASEC

19

Summary comparative table of subregional agreements

Issue Subregional agreements under the scope of the study Number of agreements mentioning this issue (“weight”)

GMS CBTA ASEAN agreements ECO TTFA TRACECA SCO CIS AMCTG  (or others as specified) 

Harmonization of traffic rules and regulations, signs and signals

Art 15, 26, Annex 7 GMS CBTA

Article 8 AFAFGIT;Art.8 AFAFIST

Art.14 (ref. to conventions)

Art.7 Basic Agreement 4

Technical requirements (weights and dimensions, axle load, emission standards, etc)

Art 13 GMS CBTA Art.11 and Protocol 4 AFAFGIT Art.18 and Annex IV Art.4 TART(weights and dimensions)

Art 6 CIS Agreement on Weights and Dimensions, 1999

6

Mutual recognition of weighing certificates

CIS Agreement on International Weighing Certificate, 2004

1

Mutual recognition of technical inspection certificates

Art 14 GMS CBTA Art.12 AFAFGIT, Art.12 AFAFIST Art. 21 Art.6 TART 4

Motor Vehicle third‐party insurance

Art 16 GMS CBTA (ref. to national legislation)

Art.14 and Protocol 5 AFAFGIT, Art.14 AFAFIST+ Protocol 5 AFAFGIT

Art 22 and Annex V Art.9 4

Mutual recognition of driving licenses

Art 17 GMS CBTA (ref to ASEAN ‐harmonized)

Art.13 AFAFGIT; Art.13 AFAFIST Art.20 Art.6 TART Art.10 Art.10 6

Conditions for transport (carrier liability, etc)

Art 24 and Annex 10 GMS CBTA

AFAMT – for multimodal transport Art.27 and Annex VI CIS Convention on International Carriage of Passengers and Luggage, 1997 (passenger operations)

3

20

Main conclusions

• SRAs are different in structure and in nature:– Comprehensive agreements– Agreements covering particular issues

• SRAs contain many similar provisions related to road transportfacilitation

• In some cases, their provisions are harmonized and contain no legalconflict

• In some cases, the provisions of SRAs are of declarative nature whichimpose no concrete obligations

• Difficulties in implementation remains the key issue for SRAs efficiency

21

Recommendations for planning subregional agreements

1. Assessment of:• possibility of negotiating SRAs in reasonable time when planning

new SRAs• possibility of subsequent practical implementation of the concluded

SRAs• realistic tasks which can be solved through SRAs which are planned

or being negotiated2. Potential contracting parties should also identify legal issues which canbe efficiently settled through bilateral agreements3. Potential contracting parties can utilize “modular approach” fordesigning SRAs4. “Step-by-step” approach to implementation mechanisms4. The proposed model subregional agreement can serve as a commonframework for subregional agreements on transport facilitation

22

Proposed Model Subregional Agreement on Transport Facilitation

23

Proposed model subregional agreement on Transport Facilitation

Structural elements• Preamble• Definitions and abbreviations• Objectives and purposes, general provisions• Scope: road transport• Specific provisions• Final provisions• Annexes and protocols

24

Proposed model subregional agreement on Transport Facilitation: specific issues

I. Transport issues• Road transport permits• Traffic rights• Designation of routes and border crossings

Considering options

25

Road transport permits and traffic rights: subregional agreements only

Subregional agreement

Traffic rights

Permit systemCP CP

CP

SRA: traffic rights+permit system

Subregional permits and bilateral traffic rights

Subregional agreement

Permit system only

Bilateral agreements

Traffic rights only

CP CP

CP

SRA: permit quota

Traffic rights

Bilateral agreements+ supplementary use of subregional agreement (status quo)

Bilateral agreements

Traffic rights

Permit system

Subregional agreements

Multilateral traffic rights

Permit system (supplementary)

CP CP

CP

SRA: trfficrights+permit system

Bilateral

Subregional system + provision of greater facilities at bilateral level (recommended option)

Subregional agreement

Traffic rights

Permit system

Bilateral agreements

Traffic rights with greater facilities

Admission of vehicles with greater facilities (e.g. w/o

permits)

CP CP

CP

SRA: permits+trafficrights

Bilateral +

Proposed model subregional agreement on Transport Facilitation: specific issues

I. Transport issues (continued):• Mutual recognition of driving licenses• Harmonization of requirements for road vehicle documents

(registration certificate, technical inspection certificate)• Harmonization of requirements for weights and dimensions• Vehicle third-party insurance system• Carrier licensing (common minimum criteria)• Provisions for passenger transport• Provisions for specific categories of goods

30

Proposed model subregional agreement on Transport Facilitation: specific issues

II. Fiscal and Customs issues:• Charges and other financial obligations• Temporary importation of vehicles

(customs duty exemption)• Harmonization and simplification of

Customs procedures and formalities• Customs cooperation

31

Proposed model subregional agreement on Transport Facilitation: specific issues

III. Other facilitation issues:• Administrative assistance (exchange of

information by control authorities, mutual assistance)

• Miscellaneous (establishment of offices, etc)

32

Proposed model subregional agreement on Transport Facilitation: specific issues

IV. Relationship with national legislation:• Non-discriminatory enforcement of national legislation• Compliance with national legislation• Transparency and availability of national legislation• National provisions for transit fee exemption

33

Proposed model subregional agreementon Transport Facilitation

V. Relationship with other international treaties:

• Harmonization Based on International Legal Instruments

• Reference to other international treaties of the contracting parties

• Provision of greater facilities

34

Proposed model subregional agreement on Transport Facilitation

VI. Institutional arrangements, implementation and monitoring mechanisms:

• Inter-Governmental structures• National structures for implementation and monitoring• Designation of competent authorities• Secretariat support• Dispute settlement arrangements

35

Proposed model subregional agreementon Transport Facilitation

VII. Final provisions:

• Entry into force• Term of agreement• Domestic procedures• Procedure for amendment• Possibility of accession by other countries (not only from one

SRO)• Procedure for accession by non-signatories• Suspension• Denunciation• Languages and their authenticity

36

Issues recommended to be settled by separate subregional agreements

• Facilitation of visas and immigration controls for professional drivers

• Harmonization and simplification of documentation and procedures

• Customs transit procedure

• Facilitation of border-crossing formalities and inspections

• Private law (carrier liability and contractual relationship)

37

Conclusion• The proposed Model Subregional Agreement can be applied

for drafting and negotiating new subregional agreements andfor planning amendments to existing agreements

• The main goal for the region: harmonization of provisions ofdifferent legal instruments, establishment of legal regimefavourable for development of international transportthroughout the region

• Effective legal regime is one of the key elements of improvingintra-regional transport connectivity

38

Thank youwww. unescap.org/our-work/transport